[H] 680 Max Oc V 7970 Max Oc

[Razargh]

People seem to forget that this 680 is basically what the 670 Ti would have been. Until we see the GK110 lineup from Nvidia then we will know the full power of Kepler. Very interesting though to finally see some trading blows between team red and green.

 

[tommybhoy]

People seem to forget that this 680 is basically what the 670 Ti would have been. Until we see the GK110 lineup from Nvidia then we will know the full power of Kepler. Very interesting though to finally see some trading blows between team red and green.

Although what your saying about the 680/670 mystery rings true, the bottom line is that it's both teams current fastest single gpu solution regardless of what would have been.

If anything Nvidia have slapped their customers in the face pricing the card higher than it should be, which in turn would have forced AMD's hand to drop the prices on all of their 7 series line up, but both don't want to do that do they?

AMD will probably have their equivalent performing card on the table when daddy Kepler appears.

 

[Masterdeadly]

So I should get a EVGA 680 and just leave it how it comes?

 

[drunkenmaster]

Exactly Gibbo, it's what most of the 'true' enthusiasts here have been saying since release.

Now we have solid figures, if anything, as confirmed by the Vortez 680 review, Nvidia's performance dominance has been reduced to almost nothing by AMD this round.

At the end of the day, nobody can complain about the performance available with either card.

This isn't the case at all, Nvidia's inability for, not even close to the first time has let AMD potentially have the better card out this round, they haven't reduced the gap to nothing.

Last time around AMD/nvidia had a core around about 360mm2, and Nvidia had another one at 530mm2, AMD were 15% behind in performance vs a core 40% bigger, and beat the similarly sized 560ti comfortably.

This round Nvidia's just over 300mm2 card is matching AMD's just over 350mm2 card, that is a massive gain from Nvidia to AMD, not the other way around.

It's not quite that simple because, nvidia has stripped out a LOT from kepler in terms of compute and offloaded significant work to the CPU(I do wonder how much power the cpu uses via drivers in a game vs a 580gtx), this helped cut out a bunch of hardware, which helped chop out a significant portion of die space, AND aiming it at 1080p really with a 256bit bus also helped it die size wise.

Make no mistake, pitcarn is more efficient than Kepler even with hardware scheduling on die and better compute performance, AMD haven't "lost" any ground, the 7970 is just a very different beast, and not well concieved.

Nvidia went from a circa 360mm2 size core, took out compute, hardware scheduling which likely dropped the size below 300mm2, and then re-added more raw horsepower in to bring the size back up. Think of it this way a 560ti with compute and hardware scheduling off die wouldn't match 6970 performance, it would have needed another 15-20% shader power.

So you can think of a 680gtx as this gen's 560ti, with 30% of the core moved off die, and 10-15% readded as more shaders, you get a highly efficient and VERY focused gaming card, it IS great.

But still not the whole story, the 7970 kept the same die size as the 6970, moved scheduling on die, added more compute AND added a bigger bus, which really isn't used except for compute and eyefinity(where it does spank the 680gtx once you factor in 680gtx doing half frame rate on 2 out of 3 screens and still being beaten... essentially 7970 offers the same performance byt the 680gtx is effectively driving 2 screens instead of three(3 screens at 60fps each, 180fps vs 1 screen at 60fps, and 2 at 30fps, giving 120fps, in other words the 7970 is really giving 50% better performance in eyefinity ).


Nvidia did the "right" thing, gamers mostly use 1080p, and mostly game, pitcarn is what AMD should have made for "gamers" at the same size as Kepler and AMD would have won this round hands down, likewise the 7970 should have been a 400-430mm2 core and 20% faster, that's life. AMD wanted to fit in everything including the kitchen sink but not comprimise on die size.

GK110 will lucky suffer the same "problems" as AMD, hardware scheduling(quite probably due to compute), more cache maybe, bigger mem bus, its likely the massively bigger die, same way as AMD, will be mostly eaten up by not gaming specific hardware It will CRUSH a 680gtx in tri screen gaming, and will be fast, but not as much faster as you'd hope given its size.

AMD/Nvidia really should make HPC/GPGPU only cards, at stupid sizes with stupid costs, and make gaming cards for gamers. AMD or Nvidia making a 400-450mm2 core with 384bit bus, little to no compute and software scheduling = huge bags of awesome.

EDIT:- of course with a £315 Asus 7950 Direct CU, I know which way I'm going myself

 

[BodgeITandRun]

The difference at stock was due to the 7970 being released with a very low static stock core clock speed.

Oh yeah I see that and think it was a mistake really on AMD's part. Now some of these review sites compare stock 7970's to stock 680's, which invariably shows the 7970 doing worse. I mean I suppose it's fair in a way, since not everybody does overclock, but it's fairer IMO to show stock and overclocked too.

Since stock 7970's ship with lower clocks/performance (before overclocking), I think that is cause alone for a 30/40 quid reduction compared to Nvidia.

 

[Skynet5]

Just be warm in the knowledge everyone that Nvidia have made such a good architecture they can release a chip at the same price as the 7970 and pretty much equal AMD. Sell a whole lot of them to pay off their R+D costs and when they come to release the mother of all versions it will be RRP-cost-marketing=Profit!


I don't think AMD have much longer to live, they can't be making much money on these (as the 7970 is made of much better quality components for sure), and their budget for R+D must be tight, because they don't have a team that can deliver at the moment.

I'm not taking any sides, I've yet to install my just been delivered 680 sli (probably turn out to be a nightmare), this is my first Nvidia card ever, and I'm alway gamed on AMD and before that 3dfx.

 

[tommybhoy]

This isn't the case at all, Nvidia's inability for, not even close to the first time has let AMD potentially have the better card out this round, they haven't reduced the gap to nothing.

I don't know who's the confused one here, whether I'm picking you up wrong or vice versa, but I'm talking about how Amd has cut Nvidia's gaming performance advantage down to almost zero when both are going flat out balls to the wall.

Last time out, same scenario with the 6970/580 oc'ed to the max the 580 was capable of outpacing it's closest rival.

For AMD to reduce/negate the gap so much with a card released ~3 months earlier is quite an achievement imo.

The core size, to me is a moot point as I'm(and most others) only interested in the gaming performance/temps/noise/price.

 

[dave_beast]

I don't think AMD have much longer to live,

Wonder who supplies the GPU for current Xbox's? Wonder who's supplying the new Xbox gpu?

The enthusiast market (us) for AMD and Nvidia is a very small percentage of their sales.

 

[Razargh]

I do feel sorry for AMD being battered in both markets, it can't be easy fighting a war on 2 fronts. If AMD can release a HD8000 card in the time it takes nvidia to release the GK110 then it could be interesting. Healthy competition is what is needed to fuel research and to lower prices.

 

[Locky]

The 7970 is a great piece of hardware let down by piece of **** drivers tbh, always has been the case with ATI.

 

[Gregster]

I don't know who's the confused one here, whether I'm picking you up wrong or vice versa, but I'm talking about how Amd has cut Nvidia's gaming performance advantage down to almost zero when both are going flat out balls to the wall.

Last time out, same scenario with the 6970/580 oc'ed to the max the 580 was capable of outpacing it's closest rival.

For AMD to reduce/negate the gap so much with a card released ~3 months earlier is quite an achievement imo.

The core size, to me is a moot point as I'm(and most others) only interested in the gaming performance/temps/noise/price.

I 100% agree with this. In true gaming performance, like you stated in your first post, Get 2 rigs set up and put BF3 on and ask what card is in each system and nobody would be able to tell the difference, as both play at a very good fps with all settings maxed.

Good thread Tommy.

 

[Gerard]

I do feel sorry for AMD being battered in both markets, it can't be easy fighting a war on 2 fronts. If AMD can release a HD8000 card in the time it takes nvidia to release the GK110 then it could be interesting. Healthy competition is what is needed to fuel research and to lower prices.

Theyre only being hit in the gpu market because of their prices, about time they got the thumb out and undercut the 680.

 

[Masterdeadly]

Tommy what 680 do you suggest?

 

[tommybhoy]

I 100% agree with this. In true gaming performance, like you stated in your first post, Get 2 rigs set up and put BF3 on and ask what card is in each system and nobody would be able to tell the difference, as both play at a very good fps with all settings maxed.

Good thread Tommy.

Thanks Gregg, good to see a 680 owner with his eyes firmly on the game and not putting out a tantrum(goes for 7970 owners too) about my cards faster than yours.

Sadly, being the topic it is, it will no doubt go **** up the same way as the other threads.

@Masterdeadly, the cheapest 680, failing that Evga for the win!

In your case though, I'd be more inclined going for a 2500K and mb first before thinking about a new gpu though.

 

[Masterdeadly]

That's true looking at £600 which is pretty much a brand new pc already after 51 Months damn.

 

[Gregster]

Thanks Gregg, good to see a 680 owner with his eyes firmly on the game and not putting out a tantrum(goes for 7970 owners too) about my cards faster than yours.

Sadly, being the topic it is, it will no doubt go **** up the same way as the other threads.

@Masterdeadly, the cheapest 680, failing that Evga for the win!

In your case though, I'd be more inclined going for a 2500K and mb first before thinking about a new gpu though.

I think the dust is settling now and we can all take a step back and actually see there is absoloutley no difference in the real world between the two (can probably stick the 7950 in this fray also).

They both clock nicely and both have good cooling/power usage.

 

[tommybhoy]

100% with you there gregster.

@Masterdeadly,

A [email protected] + 6950 is no slouch mate.

You will see a very good gain, even at 4.2GHz AUTO overclock simply by pushing the blue button using MSI's oc Genie on their motherboards.

 

[drunkenmaster]

I don't know who's the confused one here, whether I'm picking you up wrong or vice versa, but I'm talking about how Amd has cut Nvidia's gaming performance advantage down to almost zero when both are going flat out balls to the wall.

Last time out, same scenario with the 6970/580 oc'ed to the max the 580 was capable of outpacing it's closest rival.

For AMD to reduce/negate the gap so much with a card released ~3 months earlier is quite an achievement imo.

The core size, to me is a moot point as I'm(and most others) only interested in the gaming performance/temps/noise/price.

You're reading it wrong.

Last gen you had 580gtx with a 15% lead on a 6970, with a 15% lead on a 560ti. Their die sizes were in the same order, roughly 530mm2, 370mm2, and 360mm2(okay I'm making up the last one, its close but a tad smaller).

So last gen AMD had a card 15% faster at about the same die size. The 580gtx was around 40% bigger but less than half of that percentage faster, it ate a lot more power, cost a ****LOAD more to make and the 480gtx version was basically a loss leader with such low yields and high die size.


Likewise AMD was 15-20% faster than Nvidia's 560ti when both cards had a similar die size, AMD was able to sell their card at £300, nvidia was selling them at £200, and both would have cost a similar amount to make, so AMD was making vastly more cash with a faster card that cost the same to make, this was a pure win on every level for AMD.

This gen, the 680gtx is almost 20% SMALLER than the 7970, so this time IT costs less to make, while offering the same performance.

So last gen, AMD/Nvidia, same sized cores, 15-20% performance advantage to AMD, this gen Nvidia has gone 20% smaller with the same performance... or in other words, Nvidia has both improved performance vs AMD by 20%, AND reduced the size of that card by 20%, this is a monumental turn around by Nvidia(as I said above there are many reasons for that, which are actually not based on efficiency or balls out performance, but because Nvidia targetted perfectly for a big enough only gaming part, while AMD made a kitchen sink and all compute/gaming card and made it way to small).


The only difference is, in this gen they haven't released their 530mm2 part yet, this is in no way Nvidia's top end card, its their 560ti replacement.

Nvidia, through making exactly the right call(for a change) on where to target the card(sub 350mm2 and PURE gaming) have moved their MIDRANGE card to match AMD's high end card..... this is not AMD matching Nvidia's high end card.

The 7950 is the card to get in any regard right now, clocking room galore, much better value(if you buy the good value deals), the 670ti will potentially be the best value card when it launches(as the "next card down" simply ALWAYS offers better value for money, and neither the 7970/680gtx offer any real value), though AMD will most likely adjust pricing to match when that happens.

7950, 5-10% less performance at the same overclock as both a 680gtx/7970, 7950 should beat a 680gtx in surround gaming, and not far off 25% less than both the other options. 10% less performance, 25% cheaper..... pretty easy choice. The 670ti will also likely offer 10% less total performance than the 680gtx for 25-35% less cost.... though AMD don't stunt bus width on their next tier down, Nvidia often do, the 670ti/gtx/whatever it gets called, if it is a 1.5Ghz card with 192-224bit bus COULD start to run into serious bandwidth problems with high res setups, as the 680gtx already does so.

 

[Masterdeadly]

1GB 6950 is getting on a bit though now mate.

 

[mmj_uk]

Actually like straxusii pointed out earlier the GTX680 seems to have less of a bottleneck than 7970, even at stock compared to a max overclocked 7970 it appears to maintain a similar or higher minimum frame rate, with that gap extending when the GTX680 is at max overclock.

So going by this review it's fair to say that GTX680 even at stock speeds provides a more stable gaming experience with less severe dips in frame-rate.